In article ,
Sandman wrote:

I am currently running both Aperture and Lightroom with the same
photos, and there are a number of things LR is sorely lacking.
Here are a few I've talked about in the past:

1. No auto-sync with cloud storage
2. No "Events" to automatically group your photos
3. No high dynamic range in curves
4. Many problems with importing photos if there are videos in the batch
5. Slow to use and slow to import
6. Poor Facebook/Flickr support
7. Buggy support for lens data in EXIF
8. Pretty cumbersome workflow
9. No support for face recognition
10. No support for drag'n'drop of current version of photo

those are anywhere from completely bogus to coming in lightroom 6 to
minor issues.

Nothing bogus, and some are minor but still bothersome. Not sure what of the
above you think will be in LR6, there hasn't been any official word from
Adobe
yet. The things that are being rumored are things like content-aware editing.

adobe has already stated that facial recognition, gpu offloading, major
speed improvements, including import/export are coming.

Sandman:
Might have missed some. But, having said that, here are some
positive things about Lightroom over Apertu

1. Far better noise reduction (not as good as DxO Optics, but good
enough) 2. "Clarity" is a lot better than "Definition" 3. Lens
correction built in, no need to use DxO Optics. 4. Support for
more publishing services via plugins, even if the UI is awful.

'awful ui' is subjective.

Well, of course.

then it can't be included in your list.

far more people prefer lightroom's ui than they did aperture. that's
partly why aperture was a dud.

How do you figure?

adobe has said so.

By the same logic, far more people prefer Windows UI than
the Mac UI and Windows is far superior than Macs.

nope. more people use windows but that doesn't mean they prefer it.
most use it because that's what they're given. they aren't choosing it.

I just find this line of
thinking hard to swallow from a Mac user.

that's your problem.

Just because Android and Windows is used far more than iPhone and Macs
doesn't
mean they have superior UI or that far more people think they do.

that's also not the same thing.

this is about a choice of two apps on the same platform, not hardware
platforms.

I'm sure some people think the Lightroom UI is better than Aperture, but I
would bet the reason why most people are using Lightroom is due to Aperture
not
being available to Windows users, and most people use Windows, so they had no
choice what so ever.

nope. this has nothing to do with windows users. stop moving the
goalpost.

For Mac users, some switched due to Aperture not being
updated enough, plus it's easier to use the same tool as your Windows
colleagues do, since there is a line of support.

lightroom has always held the lead over aperture.

Sandman:
OSX Photos, now in public beta, is no Aperture replacement. It's
hardly even a iPhoto replacement. We'll see how it matures, and
if it will truly have non- destructive plugins (which some have
claimed, but can't back up).

it slots between iphoto and aperture, exactly as intended.

No, it doesn't. It currently "slots" beneath iPhoto, lacking many features of
iPhoto. Perhaps when it's out of beta, it will close to iPhoto, but currently
it isn't.

one key area in which it's ahead is speed. it's way the **** faster
than iphoto.

You're the one that kept claiming that OSX Photos "looked a lot" like both
Aperture and Lightroom, when it's nowhere near either of them. You also said
that there was a big chance of OSX Photos leaving Lightroom "in the dust".
Well, that's not working out really well.

eventually. it's not done yet.